Cal.: The good faith exception doesn’t save a cell phone search that wasn’t even valid before Riley in California

The good faith exception doesn’t save a cell phone search that wasn’t even valid before Riley in California. “In People v. Diaz (2011) 51 Cal.4th 84 (Diaz), we held that, incident to a custodial arrest, police may search through data on a defendant’s cellular phone without obtaining a warrant. The United States Supreme Court subsequently held to the contrary in Riley v. California (2014) 573 U.S. __ (Riley). We conclude the warrantless search of defendant Paul Macabeo’s phone would not have been proper even under our decision in Diaz, and a reasonably well-trained officer would have so known. Under these circumstances, the search violated the Fourth Amendment and the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule does not apply. We reverse the Court of Appeal’s contrary judgment.” People v. Macabeo, 2016 Cal. LEXIS 9586 (Dec. 5, 2016).

It wasn’t even valid under the search incident doctrine, so why would the GFE conceivably even apply?